Biography

Upon receiving his law degree, Thomas moved to Arizona where he joined a Phoenix-based private practice law firm as a civil litigation attorney. In 1994, he served as Assistant Attorney General for Arizona before later working for then-Governor Fife Symington III as both deputy counsel and criminal justice policy advisor. Thomas then joined the attorney's office of Maricopa County - first operating as a Deputy County Attorney in 2003 before being elected as the County Attorney the next year.

It was during his tenure as Maricopa County Attorney that Thomas served as a frequent adviser to the Arizona State Legislature on the formation of the now controversial state immigration measure, Senate Bill 1070 - The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act. In encouraging GovernorJan Brewer to sign the legislation, he argued in favor of its necessity, stating the “law would give state and local law enforcement officials important new tools for the fight against illegal immigration." [3]

After RepublicanGovernorJan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law on April 23, 2010, Thomas vowed that if elected state attorney general he would vigorously fight in favor of the legislation. He further noted that of the five candidates running for the statewide governmental position, he was the only one who was fully supportive of the measure. [4]

2010

Thomas ran for election as attorney general in 2010. Following the primary election, Thomas refused to concede the Republican nomination to ultimate victor Tom Horne until every single vote was counted, a process that continued for a nearly a week after Arizona voters went to the polls on Tuesday, August 24, 2010. [6][7][8] Finally, on Tuesday, September 1, he conceded the nomination to his primary opponent when, after all the votes had been recounted, it was determined that Horne had maintained a 899 vote lead over the former attorney. [9]

Controversies

In 2008, the Arizona State Bar launched an official investigation into complaints of alleged misconduct that occurred during Thomas's tenure as Maricopa County Attorney. Shortly thereafter Thomas filed a Petition for Special Action with the Arizona Supreme Court in an effort to halt the proceedings. [13] Thomas argued that the partition against him was politically motivated. He stated that county judges who refused to enforce Proposition 100, a voter approved ballot measure "that ended the right to bail for illegal immigrants accused of serious felonies," encouraged the State Bar to launch the investigation after his office called out those judges for not performing their civic duty. [14] In response, the State Bar requested the court to dismiss the petition calling for a special jurisdiction and called for Thomas to "address his concerns properly within the established disciplinary investigation process." [15] On August 15, 2008, the State Supreme Court official rejected Thomas's petition and called for the State Bar to proceed with its inquiry. The following year, however, Thomas was cleared of all thirteen state bar complaints lodged against him.

A month prior to his announcement that he would launch a campaign to seek the statewide office of attorney general, the Arizona Supreme Court, at the urging of the State Bar, appointed a special investigator to examine accusations of misconduct by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office "after a Pima County judge accused Thomas of misusing his authority to investigate county supervisors, and doing so for political gain." [16] However, Ronald Rotunda, a professor of law at Chapman University School of Law in California and a leading expert in the nation on legal ethics and constitutional law, argued in an affidavit that the inquiry is "illegal and an unconstitutional violation of due process of law." [17] Rotunda concluded that the investigation was illegal based on the fact that John Phelps, Executive Director of the State Bar, misrepresented his authority when he called for a special investigation of Thomas, a power that is reserved exclusively to the Chief Bar Counsel.

RICO spending

Tim Nelson, former general counsel to then Governor Janet Napolitano and a Democratic candidate for Maricopa County Attorney in 2008, held a press conference in late-July to criticize what he argued was Thomas's habit of using Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) funds to bankroll his self-serving agenda. These proceeds gathered "by law enforcement from asset forfeitures" are to be directed toward fighting and preventing drug use and organized crime, according to state and federal statutes. [18] Both Nelson and the left-leaning Phoenix New Times, with its own apparent axe to grind against Thomas, suggested, however, that the Maricopa County Attorney funneled the money toward organizations and individuals that shored up his name recognition. Among the funds earmarked for these groups, as cited by the New Times, was $168,000 directed toward Christian-based organizations the paper claims were engaging in proselytizing, the act of attempting to convert people to another opinion or religion. Though the New Times argues that proselytizing is illegal, there are no laws or statutes, federal or state, deeming it as such. The circulation also chastised Thomas's use of the funds to "finance a conference on illegal immigration in Phoenix in 2005" for the simple reason that it is not "something that the Justice Department allows RICO funding to be used for." [19] This, of course, despite the threat of Mexican drug cartels that have been a source of contention on the Arizona-Mexican border.